NEW DELHI: A district consumer forum here has asked travel company Thomas Cook India to issue an apology to one of its customers for deficient service and refund 70 per cent of the amount additionally charged from him.
The New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal forum recently directed the travel agency to pay to the complainant Rs 93,811, 70 per cent of the amount additionally charged from him for rescheduling his travel without informing him in advance.
The commission also directed Thomas Cook India to pay to Ajay Mishra, a resident of Janakpuri, Rs 10,000 along with litigation cost of Rs 2,000 within 30 days.
"We hold the opposite party (Thomas Cook India) to be deficient in service to some extent and direct it to issue the apology letter to the complainant," said commission's president Arun Kumar Arya and its members Nipur Chandna and H M Vyas.
According to Mishra's complaint, he had booked a 'Fusion Europe Tour' of the travel company which was tentatively scheduled for May 2, 2014.
The travel company applied for Mishra's visa on April 22 and it was received on May 6, four days after the booking date. Therefore, the journey was rescheduled for May 20. It was further rescheduled for May 22.
Mishra was asked to pay an additional amount of Rs 1.34 lakh for rescheduling of the trip by the company, failing which, the company told him, the entire amount would stand forfeited.
The commission said charging of the extra amount by the travel company was not called for and that Mishra should have been informed about rescheduling of the trip well in advance.
"In such facts and circumstances, the commencement of the tour by the complainant was not feasible for want of Schengen Visa and therefore the opposite party ought to have conveyed (to) the complainant for rescheduling of the tour well in advance," it said.
"The opposite party informed the complainant to opt for the changed date of tour and to make payment of the demanded amount otherwise the entire amount paid would be forfeited. The opposite party levied the amount of Rs 1,34,017 which was not called for in our considered view," it said.